By Kenneth Christiane L. Basilio, Reporter
CONGRESSMEN submitted a resolution on Wednesday seeking to amend the 1987 Constitution to lower the minimum age requirement for candidates running for presidential, vice-presidential (VP) and senatorial posts, citing the need to inject youth into the country’s national leadership.
Resolution of Both Houses (RBH) No. 2 seeks to lower the minimum age for presidential and vice-presidential candidates to 35 years old and senatorial candidates to 30 years old, both five years lower than what is currently prescribed in the Constitution.
“Lowering the age qualifications for national leadership posts will align the Philippines with other democracies, such as the US,” the resolution filed by Deputy Speakers Francisco Paolo P. Ortega and Jefferson F. Khonghun, alongside district representatives Ernesto M. Dionisio, Jr. (Manila) and Ziaur-Rahman Alonto Adiong (Lanao del Sur).
Charter change (Cha-cha) efforts have been a recurring theme in Philippine politics, but previous attempts have always faltered due to lack of public support, driven in part by concerns about political motives.
Party-list Rep. Alfredo A. Garbin, Jr. earlier filed a resolution seeking to amend the Constitution’s economic provisions to ease foreign ownership limitations in key industries and reinforce the country’s territorial claims in the South China Sea.
Like Mr. Garbin’s proposal, RBH No. 2 seeks to amend the Constitution via a constitutional convention, which would gather delegates whose purpose is to propose changes to the charter.
The House passed a resolution in 2023 supporting a constitutional convention. A year later, it pushed joint discussions on amendments by both chambers of Congress. A signature drive to support Cha-cha also fizzled amid allegations that lawmakers were behind the initiative.
There is a need to lower the minimum age requirement for national posts to reflect “major demographic and social shifts,” the resolution read, citing that 52% of the population is under the age of 30.
“This reform strengthens youth representation, promotes intergenerational leadership and embodies the spirit of inclusivity, renewal and empowerment of the next generation of leaders,” it added.
The Resolution of Both Houses No. 2 may be short-sighted and likely driven by political motives, saying it lacks valid grounds for constitutional amendment, political analysts said.
“I am of the view that the proposal is too myopic,” Ederson DT. Tapia, a public administration professor at the University of Makati, said in a Facebook Messenger chat. “The debates surrounding the age requirement have been exhaustively debated during the deliberation in 1986.”
“The public should be suspicious of proposals that would call for a constitutional amendment due to underlying political motives,” said Hansley A. Juliano, a political science lecturer at the Ateneo de Manila University.
“Who is expected to benefit from age lowering?” he said in a Facebook chat.
